Page 356 of 1298

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 3:22 am
by TheDocForgotHisLogon
Wilderbeast wrote:I have some meridian shares 8)

:uhoh:

*gets coat*
Yeah so do I. Doesn't make me feel any better paying 600 a month in 250sqm double glazed home. (though two daughters having half hour showers probably accounts for a fair chunk of that...)

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 3:42 am
by Mr Mike
$600, luxury!! You lads need some time paying Californian or Singapore power bills.

The great state of Texas is more reasonable than those two and more in line with NZ.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 4:27 am
by deadduck
guy smiley wrote:I live alone in a two bed apartment in East Freo that has aircon and all electric cooking. My two monthly bill averages about $70.

And the amount of your tax the govt wasted on coal subsidies is?

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 4:49 am
by deadduck
Sorry to have to stoop to presenting FACTS
But the following charts puts paid to the myth that the electricity companies have been gouging the NZ public since the partial privatisation

Image
Image

You can see that the prices in the last 3 years are actually the most stable they have been for the last decade


Obviously, with NZ's dependence on hydro, the weather patterns play an enormous role in the cost of generation. The dry South Island winter in 2017 was the main driver of the increases that year. But in 2016 the prices actually dropped, due to increased discounting activity by the companies as a result of increased competition in the market.

To date it seems that the partial privatisation of the electricity companies has not had a negative impact on the price of electricity and they have been able to return larger dividends to their shareholders. Win-win-win , where is the problem?

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 4:58 am
by Fat Old Git
guy smiley wrote:
booji boy wrote:
guy smiley wrote:Are NZ power prices higher than Australia's?

That's f**king terrible.
Prices are horrendous here. Moving from Auckland to Taupo about 10 years ago it really shocked me how expensive it is to heat a home in a colder climate and how there is no subsidy for colder regions where more energy is needed to heat homes. It was much cheaper in a place like Auckland where the climate is much more moderate. I can afford it of course but it made me think how expensive it must be for lower income families to heat their homes. Foraging for firewood and pine cones is the answer I guess. :?
So Australia, with it's vast distances, extreme environmental conditions and spectacularly inept government is still cheaper for power than the Rockstar economy surging along after a decade of enlightened economic management?

People have rocks in their heads.
Weren't the power companies sold off before the age of the rock star economy? I vaguely remember something about how privatization would introduce competition and hence efficiencies, but that hasn't really happened. Which probably isn't surprising given they're pretty much all sharing the same network if I understand it correctly. So instead of having 2 factories making stuff and competing against each other, you just have the same one with 2 differently branded shops out the front.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 4:59 am
by deadduck
guy smiley wrote:

Anyway... where's the justification lie in a $600 monthly power bill for 4 people?

Wind turbines aren't cheap mate.
The cost of building new generation falls entirely on the generation companies. It's the price we have to pay for having 90% renewable energy.

It would be cheaper to wack up half a dozen gas turbines but that would not be in the NZ spirit.

Clean and green and all that shit.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:03 am
by BillW
deadduck wrote:Sorry to have to stoop to presenting FACTS
But the following charts puts paid to the myth that the electricity companies have been gouging the NZ public since the partial privatisation

Image
Image

You can see that the prices in the last 3 years are actually the most stable they have been for the last decade


Obviously, with NZ's dependence on hydro, the weather patterns play an enormous role in the cost of generation. The dry South Island winter in 2017 was the main driver of the increases that year. But in 2016 the prices actually dropped, due to increased discounting activity by the companies as a result of increased competition in the market.

To date it seems that the partial privatisation of the electricity companies has not had a negative impact on the price of electricity and they have been able to return larger dividends to their shareholders. Win-win-win , where is the problem?
Don't try to confuse the issue by introducing facts.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 5:57 am
by UncleFB
BillW wrote:
deadduck wrote:Sorry to have to stoop to presenting FACTS
But the following charts puts paid to the myth that the electricity companies have been gouging the NZ public since the partial privatisation

Image
Image

You can see that the prices in the last 3 years are actually the most stable they have been for the last decade


Obviously, with NZ's dependence on hydro, the weather patterns play an enormous role in the cost of generation. The dry South Island winter in 2017 was the main driver of the increases that year. But in 2016 the prices actually dropped, due to increased discounting activity by the companies as a result of increased competition in the market.

To date it seems that the partial privatisation of the electricity companies has not had a negative impact on the price of electricity and they have been able to return larger dividends to their shareholders. Win-win-win , where is the problem?
Don't try to confuse the issue by introducing facts.
Some selective stating - the deregulation happened many years before that (top graph) and saw continuing price rises that the Nats thought about regulatory options to cap prices when they did the partial sell offs. Also, you'd hope prices would stabilise in 2016 as the dividends being paid out suggests the companies are doing fine at those prices.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 7:47 am
by merlin the happy pig
guy smiley wrote:
deadduck wrote:
guy smiley wrote:

Anyway... where's the justification lie in a $600 monthly power bill for 4 people?

Wind turbines aren't cheap mate.
The cost of building new generation falls entirely on the generation companies. It's the price we have to pay for having 90% renewable energy.

It would be cheaper to wack up half a dozen gas turbines but that would not be in the NZ spirit.

Clean and green and all that shit.
:lol: :thumbup:

Agreed.. invest for the future demand of course. I think the solution lies in a sort of micro grid arrangement myself, PV arrays on every house, battery storage and perhaps wind providing networked generation and control. It's only part of it of course and there's a shedload of renewable generation methods being run now.

But capitalism and all that shit.
Really need some good modelling to determine weather distributed generation + battery backup is more cost effective than centralised, with a distribution network.
Obviously generation is far more efficient (installation wise if nothing else for PV) for a large plant vs a backyard/rooftop installation. The network obviously offsets that partly/completely.

Battery backup right now is very expensive, and maybe on balance less environmentally sound than the status quo with more large renewable plants.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 8:48 pm
by Enzedder
Seneca of the Night wrote:I see Bob Jones is suing the woman who started the petition to have his knighthood removed:

http://www.newstalkzb.co.nz/news/nation ... n-creator/

Could be entertaining.

Can I be on the jury please?

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 9:30 pm
by booji boy
Pike River re entry to take longer than expected. Wow! What a shock! The way they were talking during the election I thought Labour would have sent a crew down lead by Winston Peters the week after the election.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/104507 ... n-expected

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 9:36 pm
by Wilderbeast
booji boy wrote:Pike River re entry to take longer than expected. Wow! What a shock! The way they were talking during the election I thought Labour would have sent a crew down lead by Winston Peters the week after the election.

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/104507 ... n-expected
Pike river is everything that is wrong with politics and more.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 10:06 pm
by Sonny Blount
Fat Old Git wrote:
guy smiley wrote:
booji boy wrote:
guy smiley wrote:Are NZ power prices higher than Australia's?

That's f**king terrible.
Prices are horrendous here. Moving from Auckland to Taupo about 10 years ago it really shocked me how expensive it is to heat a home in a colder climate and how there is no subsidy for colder regions where more energy is needed to heat homes. It was much cheaper in a place like Auckland where the climate is much more moderate. I can afford it of course but it made me think how expensive it must be for lower income families to heat their homes. Foraging for firewood and pine cones is the answer I guess. :?
So Australia, with it's vast distances, extreme environmental conditions and spectacularly inept government is still cheaper for power than the Rockstar economy surging along after a decade of enlightened economic management?

People have rocks in their heads.
Weren't the power companies sold off before the age of the rock star economy? I vaguely remember something about how privatization would introduce competition and hence efficiencies, but that hasn't really happened. Which probably isn't surprising given they're pretty much all sharing the same network if I understand it correctly. So instead of having 2 factories making stuff and competing against each other, you just have the same one with 2 differently branded shops out the front.

They are not privately owned. Because the government has 51% of each company (and 64% overall), the private owners can't so much as vote in a Chairperson of the Board.

The minority private shareholders can't get the companies to do anything innovative that the government doesn't lead them on or agree to.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2018 10:35 pm
by Wilderbeast
What innovations is the government holding them back from exactly?

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2018 1:25 am
by eugenius
Profit cascading?

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2018 5:48 am
by Mr Mike
Just outrageous, it is scandalous that the Government allows this to occur. For the good of all Kiwis they should act immediately to drive the property market and exchange rate down to punish these foreign speculators.
In the last three months, almost 20 per cent or one in five central Auckland property sales were to overseas buyers.

Data from Statistics New Zealand showed this was about 450 sales in the Waitematā Ward, which includes Waiheke Island.

The government is currently in the process of amending the Overseas Investment Act to prevent foreigners who didn't have residency and weren't New Zealand citizens from buying houses here.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2018 5:57 am
by Mr Mike
guy smiley wrote::lol:
You can laugh but you’ll certainly appreciate the savings to pay your power bill once you have relocated.

Any idea why the amendment to the OIA is taking so long?

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Thu Jun 07, 2018 6:11 am
by Mr Mike
guy smiley wrote:
Mr Mike wrote:
guy smiley wrote::lol:
You can laugh but you’ll certainly appreciate the savings to pay your power bill once you have relocated.

Any idea why the amendment to the OIA is taking so long?
None.
A prudent fear of unintended consequences, one of which is that states goal of making houses more affordable.

https://www.adls.org.nz/for-the-profess ... ower-pace/

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 9:09 am
by kiweez
Northcote - Preliminary Count

Electorate No. 34 - 24 of 33 results counted

VOTES COUNTED: 14,437 - 72.7%
LEADING CANDIDATE: BIDOIS, Dan 7,394
2nd CANDIDATE: HALBERT, Shanan 6,368
CURRENT MARGIN: 1,026

https://www.electionresults.govt.nz/

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 9:10 am
by Enzedder
No way that was going Red

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 9:28 am
by Enzedder
94% counted

Code: Select all

Candidates	      Party	    Votes
BIDOIS, Dan           NAT      9489
HALBERT, Shanan    LAB      8272

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 9:32 am
by JB1981
Enzedder wrote:94% counted

Code: Select all

Candidates	      Party	    Votes
BIDOIS, Dan           NAT      9489
HALBERT, Shanan    LAB      8272
How does that compare to the margin last time?

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 9:39 am
by Thai guy
JB1981 wrote:
Enzedder wrote:94% counted

Code: Select all

Candidates	      Party	    Votes
BIDOIS, Dan           NAT      9489
HALBERT, Shanan    LAB      8272
How does that compare to the margin last time?
2014 GE National majority 9664
2017 GE National majority 6210
2018 BE National majority 1200 approx.

That’s a majority drop of 87% since 2014 and quite an alarming trend for the Nats.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:22 am
by kiweez
Thai guy wrote:
JB1981 wrote:
Enzedder wrote:94% counted

Code: Select all

Candidates	      Party	    Votes
BIDOIS, Dan           NAT      9489
HALBERT, Shanan    LAB      8272
How does that compare to the margin last time?
2014 GE National majority 9664
2017 GE National majority 6210
2018 BE National majority 1200 approx.

That’s a majority drop of 87% since 2014 and quite an alarming trend for the Nats.
Stealing this from The Standard..
The majority for National over Labour really isn’t of very much relevance in a by-election.
The sensible number to look at is the percentage of the vote that went to National plus ACT as opposed to the percentage that went to Labour plus Greens plus New Zealand First.
At the election, looking at only the votes that went to these 5 parties the Right led by 53.7% to the Left’s 46.3%. At the by election it is currently Right 52.4% and the Left 47.6%.
This is a 1.3% from Right to Left.
In practice I think that there has been no real change. There has been a swing from Right to Left of 1.3% but the Right candidates are new and the Lefts are the same as at the election. They will be better known than the National candidate.
On the other side the Labour candidate has cannibalised the other parties in the coalition. The Green Party, in particular should be getting very worried.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:25 am
by Enzedder
Pointless stats when NZ First didn't stand a candidate though.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:28 am
by kiweez
Enzedder wrote:Pointless stats when NZ First didn't stand a candidate though.
Not entirely pointless. More to demonstrate it’s the % and not the raw number with today’s margin.

That said...how ARE NZ First polling...? Think that would have made a huge difference? Genuine question, not a troll.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:36 am
by JB1981
kiweez wrote:
Enzedder wrote:Pointless stats when NZ First didn't stand a candidate though.
Not entirely pointless. More to demonstrate it’s the % and not the raw number with today’s margin.

That said...how ARE NZ First polling...? Think that would have made a huge difference? Genuine question, not a troll.
Less than 5% I think.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:49 am
by Thai guy
kiweez wrote:
Thai guy wrote:
JB1981 wrote:
Enzedder wrote:94% counted

Code: Select all

Candidates	      Party	    Votes
BIDOIS, Dan           NAT      9489
HALBERT, Shanan    LAB      8272
How does that compare to the margin last time?
2014 GE National majority 9664
2017 GE National majority 6210
2018 BE National majority 1200 approx.

That’s a majority drop of 87% since 2014 and quite an alarming trend for the Nats.
Stealing this from The Standard..
The majority for National over Labour really isn’t of very much relevance in a by-election.
The sensible number to look at is the percentage of the vote that went to National plus ACT as opposed to the percentage that went to Labour plus Greens plus New Zealand First.
At the election, looking at only the votes that went to these 5 parties the Right led by 53.7% to the Left’s 46.3%. At the by election it is currently Right 52.4% and the Left 47.6%.
This is a 1.3% from Right to Left.
In practice I think that there has been no real change. There has been a swing from Right to Left of 1.3% but the Right candidates are new and the Lefts are the same as at the election. They will be better known than the National candidate.
On the other side the Labour candidate has cannibalised the other parties in the coalition. The Green Party, in particular should be getting very worried.
That post is from a right wing commenter at The Standard. It was pointed out to that commenter that NZF didn't stand a candidate (Koloni) this time.

Also, how is a majority not relevant in a by-election when literally the majority is all that is relevant as by-elections are first past the post?

The Nats majority from the 2017 election has been reduced from 6200 (with 36K turnout) to 1350 (with 20K turnout). This is a reduction in majority of 60% in real terms.

Massively concerning for National.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:58 am
by kiweez
Thai guy wrote:
kiweez wrote:
Thai guy wrote:
JB1981 wrote:
Enzedder wrote:94% counted

Code: Select all

Candidates	      Party	    Votes
BIDOIS, Dan           NAT      9489
HALBERT, Shanan    LAB      8272
How does that compare to the margin last time?
2014 GE National majority 9664
2017 GE National majority 6210
2018 BE National majority 1200 approx.

That’s a majority drop of 87% since 2014 and quite an alarming trend for the Nats.
Stealing this from The Standard..
The majority for National over Labour really isn’t of very much relevance in a by-election.
The sensible number to look at is the percentage of the vote that went to National plus ACT as opposed to the percentage that went to Labour plus Greens plus New Zealand First.
At the election, looking at only the votes that went to these 5 parties the Right led by 53.7% to the Left’s 46.3%. At the by election it is currently Right 52.4% and the Left 47.6%.
This is a 1.3% from Right to Left.
In practice I think that there has been no real change. There has been a swing from Right to Left of 1.3% but the Right candidates are new and the Lefts are the same as at the election. They will be better known than the National candidate.
On the other side the Labour candidate has cannibalised the other parties in the coalition. The Green Party, in particular should be getting very worried.
That post is from a right wing commenter at The Standard. It was pointed out to that commenter that NZF didn't stand a candidate (Koloni) this time.

Also, how is a majority not relevant in a by-election when literally the majority is all that is relevant as by-elections are first past the post?

The Nats majority from the 2017 election has been reduced from 6200 (with 36K turnout) to 1350 (with 20K turnout). This is a reduction in majority of 60% in real terms.

Massively concerning for National.
Hey....I’m not endorsing a result one way or the other. A counter-argument could be made that with no NZF candidate, and Greens endorsing NZL, the fact that the Jacinda effect STILL could get them over the line could be seen as a massive concern for Labour.

Just devil’s advocate there. I have no real skin in this game.

Edit: ....and as previously mentioned, was just using it to demonstrate the % in play as opposed to the numbers. I endorse no opinion attached to the C&P.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 10:59 am
by JB1981
I'm not reading too much into the result without the fanfare of a full campaign. They held the seat and I doubt anyone will make too much noise about it.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:11 am
by Thai guy
kiweez wrote:
Thai guy wrote:That post is from a right wing commenter at The Standard. It was pointed out to that commenter that NZF didn't stand a candidate (Koloni) this time.

Also, how is a majority not relevant in a by-election when literally the majority is all that is relevant as by-elections are first past the post?

The Nats majority from the 2017 election has been reduced from 6200 (with 36K turnout) to 1350 (with 20K turnout). This is a reduction in majority of 60% in real terms.

Massively concerning for National.
Hey....I’m not endorsing a result one way or the other. A counter-argument could be made that with no NZF candidate, and Greens endorsing NZL, the fact that the Jacinda effect STILL could get them over the line could be seen as a massive concern for Labour.

Just devil’s advocate there. I have no real skin in this game.

Edit: ....and as previously mentioned, was just using it to demonstrate the % in play as opposed to the numbers. I endorse no opinion attached to the C&P.
I get that you have to be careful about what you say because of your job but please don't pretend you are neutral. :lol:

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sat Jun 09, 2018 11:20 am
by kiweez
Thai guy wrote:
kiweez wrote:
Thai guy wrote:That post is from a right wing commenter at The Standard. It was pointed out to that commenter that NZF didn't stand a candidate (Koloni) this time.

Also, how is a majority not relevant in a by-election when literally the majority is all that is relevant as by-elections are first past the post?

The Nats majority from the 2017 election has been reduced from 6200 (with 36K turnout) to 1350 (with 20K turnout). This is a reduction in majority of 60% in real terms.

Massively concerning for National.
Hey....I’m not endorsing a result one way or the other. A counter-argument could be made that with no NZF candidate, and Greens endorsing NZL, the fact that the Jacinda effect STILL could get them over the line could be seen as a massive concern for Labour.

Just devil’s advocate there. I have no real skin in this game.

Edit: ....and as previously mentioned, was just using it to demonstrate the % in play as opposed to the numbers. I endorse no opinion attached to the C&P.
I get that you have to be careful about what you say because of your job but please don't pretend you are neutral. :lol:
You’d be surprised where I put my ticks I’d say ;)

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 7:41 am
by booji boy
Thai guy wrote:
kiweez wrote:
Thai guy wrote:
JB1981 wrote:
Enzedder wrote:94% counted

Code: Select all

Candidates	      Party	    Votes
BIDOIS, Dan           NAT      9489
HALBERT, Shanan    LAB      8272
How does that compare to the margin last time?
2014 GE National majority 9664
2017 GE National majority 6210
2018 BE National majority 1200 approx.

That’s a majority drop of 87% since 2014 and quite an alarming trend for the Nats.
Stealing this from The Standard..
The majority for National over Labour really isn’t of very much relevance in a by-election.
The sensible number to look at is the percentage of the vote that went to National plus ACT as opposed to the percentage that went to Labour plus Greens plus New Zealand First.
At the election, looking at only the votes that went to these 5 parties the Right led by 53.7% to the Left’s 46.3%. At the by election it is currently Right 52.4% and the Left 47.6%.
This is a 1.3% from Right to Left.
In practice I think that there has been no real change. There has been a swing from Right to Left of 1.3% but the Right candidates are new and the Lefts are the same as at the election. They will be better known than the National candidate.
On the other side the Labour candidate has cannibalised the other parties in the coalition. The Green Party, in particular should be getting very worried.
That post is from a right wing commenter at The Standard. It was pointed out to that commenter that NZF didn't stand a candidate (Koloni) this time.

Also, how is a majority not relevant in a by-election when literally the majority is all that is relevant as by-elections are first past the post?

The Nats majority from the 2017 election has been reduced from 6200 (with 36K turnout) to 1350 (with 20K turnout). This is a reduction in majority of 60% in real terms.

Massively concerning for National.
Do you really believe your own BS? Labour simply cannibalized the left vote by taking votes off the Greens and NZF.

Good for Labour but hardly 'massively concerning' for National.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 10:25 am
by Dark
Funny to watch Labour get excited to win votes off their own govt partner party's but the Nats percentage of votes is only about 1.3% less than the election.

And that's after the Jassiah made a personal appearance

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:13 am
by Thai guy
Oh well. We are told to look for trends in polling and election results. The Nats' majority in Northcote in the last 4 years has dropped by 75%. That is the work of Shanan Halbert. If National aren't worried by that then that's fine.

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:21 am
by Dark
Thai guy wrote:Oh well. We are told to look for trends in polling and election results. The Nats' majority in Northcote in the last 4 years has dropped by 75%. That is the work of Shanan Halbert. If National aren't worried by that then that's fine.
Depends if you are looking at % of votes or number of votes

She doesn't take rocket science to see heaps less voters vote in by elections.

Votes

By election 19,900
2017 election 37,311

Northcote % of votes Nats

By election 50.98%
2017 election 52.27%

Hardly gravitational shift

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 11:27 am
by Dark
And certainly not 75% unless you don't actually think rationally

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 12:22 pm
by eugenius
Enzedder wrote:No way that was going Red

It would be like Labour losing South Auckland .

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 12:29 pm
by eugenius
Enzedder wrote:No way that was going Red

It would be like Labour losing South Auckland .

Re: NZ Politics Thread

Posted: Sun Jun 10, 2018 12:50 pm
by Thai guy
Dark wrote:And certainly not 75% unless you don't actually think rationally
The Nats’ majority since 2014 has been cut by 3/4 and that is taking into account the lower turnout in the by-election. The actual reduction is 88%.

The Nats’ majority since 2017 has been cut 60% accounting for turnout. These are facts.

By-elections are FPP. Only majorities matter, not percentage of the vote.

The Nats’ majority has dropped dramatically even in the face of gentrification and the economic cleansing of the electorate. They will be very concerned.